Page 1 of 1
HQ's Shattering
Posted: Wed Apr 03, 2002 3:29 am
by Die Kriegerin
Has anyone wondered why ( late 42 ) Sovets HQ's with good leadership ( 8 ) should shatter after 1 attack with the entrenchment bonus ( around Lenningrad ) and a Tank Corp w/ 60% experence and 60% readiness?...Dave if you think i'm talking about our game your right...Why do some shatter and some don't???? Ed help me.... God I love this game.
Jon
Re: HQ's Shattering
Posted: Wed Apr 03, 2002 7:02 pm
by davewolf
Originally posted by Die Kriegerin
Dave if you think i'm talking about our game your right...
Jon
Yes I do. It was also very interesting to read how many fighters you had in that certain HQ's.
Did you get my last move? I'm always unsure if you're just busy (that's okay) or if MSN is #*$% again (certainly not okay) when I don't get a move from you for some days.
God I love this game.
Me too.
Dave
Re: HQ's Shattering
Posted: Thu Apr 04, 2002 4:55 pm
by Ed Cogburn
Originally posted by Die Kriegerin
Has anyone wondered why ( late 42 ) Sovets HQ's with good leadership ( 8 ) should shatter after 1 attack with the entrenchment bonus ( around Lenningrad ) and a Tank Corp w/ 60% experence and 60% readiness?
HQs can't entrench. Second, units in an HQ are in reserve and are considered to be spread out in the rear area behind the HQ's corps, not all in the HQ's square. I suspect there may actually be some combat penalty for units in an HQ too.
Posted: Thu Apr 04, 2002 7:49 pm
by PMCN
The entrenchment bonus for northern combat does not affect the entrenchment level only that the chance to retreat is calculated as if the unit was in a scale 5 entrenchment.
Shattering if forced to retreat is not that likely with a skill 8 leader but still possible. Also in general a single tank unit is not that good on a retreat because it probably had very little strength left over, so the chance of a shatter would be very high. If you had had a few infantry divisions in the HQ you probably would not have had a shatter. I am not sure if there is any penelty to a HQ unit that is attacked. Also you probably did not loose that much of the airforce as you should find the airgroups show up in a couple of weeks at half strength or so. But if your HQs are being attacked they are too close to the front! They can be 5 hexs back and still provide support easily enough.
Re: Re: HQ's Shattering
Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2002 9:29 am
by Svar
Originally posted by Ed Cogburn
HQs can't entrench. Second, units in an HQ are in reserve and are considered to be spread out in the rear area behind the HQ's corps, not all in the HQ's square. I suspect there may actually be some combat penalty for units in an HQ too.
Ed,
This totally off topic but I thought you might be interested in this website.
http://www.paradoxplaza.com/hearts.asp
Svar
Re: Re: Re: HQ's Shattering
Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2002 3:12 pm
by czerpak
Woow,
if guys from Europa Universalis team do that, it must be really good
Re: Re: Re: HQ's Shattering
Posted: Sat Apr 06, 2002 11:25 pm
by Ed Cogburn
[Jaw drops - hits the floor]
Oh my Goodness!!!!
Could this be the one I've been waiting for? Can they really pull this off? What's up with the real time stuff though. One minute equals one hour? Does anyone with a calculater handy want to figure up how many minutes of playtime will cover Sept. '39 to May '45?!?!?
Thanks for posting this Svar.
game length
Posted: Sun Apr 07, 2002 1:10 am
by tanjman
I figure approximately (of game time)
50,352 minutes or 839.2 hours. Wow, that is alot!
Posted: Sun Apr 07, 2002 1:01 pm
by Lokioftheaesir
Originally posted by Paul McNeely
The entrenchment bonus for northern combat does not affect the entrenchment level only that the chance to retreat is calculated as if the unit was in a scale 5 entrenchment.
......
Has anyone else noticed this "the sovs get basic swamp defence attributes east of Leningrad ('round tikhvin)" even in clear hexes.
(i've edited this pauls as Pauls comment on Northern entrenchment is probably exactly what i experienced, what is this bonus for? I can understand it in winter but i've seen this sov retreat bonus in clear)
Loki
Posted: Sun Apr 07, 2002 1:21 pm
by Ed Cogburn
Originally posted by Lokioftheaesir
Has anyone else noticed this "the sovs get basic swamp defence attributes east of Leningrad ('round tikhvin)" even in clear hexes.
If you have a save game that is ready to execute the combat in question, send it to me, or Rick if he's listening and interested.
Posted: Sun Apr 07, 2002 9:34 pm
by Lokioftheaesir
Originally posted by Ed Cogburn
If you have a save game that is ready to execute the combat in question, send it to me, or Rick if he's listening and interested.
Ed
Not for that pariticular game which shares a folder with 2 others and the saves only go back a month or two.(gametime wise)
My gripe is probably the same thing mentioned by
Paul McNeely
"The entrenchment bonus for northern combat does not affect the entrenchment level only that the chance to retreat is calculated as if the
unit was in a scale 5 entrenchment."
Loki
PS. Not to worry, i just had a bad day and needed to complain about something.
Posted: Wed Apr 10, 2002 10:13 pm
by Die Kriegerin
A while back Loki ( Nick), stated that German units shattered easier during blizzards if thier readness was to high. Is there truth to this?...The reason is, I just lost Leningrad, with a combat value of 106, readness of over 96, experence over 65, entrenchment of 5, and good leadership. One turn, gone. However earler, I had less in all catigories, and survived three other attacks. Any answers. Doe's boosting readiness make a unit more prone to shattering? It dosn't make sense.
Jon
Posted: Thu Apr 11, 2002 12:32 am
by itsjustme0770
Whoa Whoa Whoa.....I said WHOA!!!!
Back up. Someone talk to me about the Hearts of Iron game from Paradox. I realize that Beta isn't due until June, but surely someone must know if this is really in serious development, particularly if the developers have the capital to pull it off and pull it off right. If this this is even half way decent and really comes out, I'd really better win the lottery.
Posted: Thu Apr 11, 2002 1:52 am
by davewolf
Originally posted by Die Kriegerin
A while back Loki ( Nick), stated that German units shattered easier during blizzards if thier readness was to high. Is there truth to this?...The reason is, I just lost Leningrad, with a combat value of 106, readness of over 96, experence over 65, entrenchment of 5, and good leadership. One turn, gone. However earler, I had less in all catigories, and survived three other attacks. Any answers. Doe's boosting readiness make a unit more prone to shattering? It dosn't make sense.
Jon
Probably you're talking about our game again.
First your army didn't shatter initially. It was forced to retreat but couldn't, so it shattered at last. I think Ed posted something about when does a unit shatter and when does it surrender if it cannot retreat inside a bigger pocket. But that's a different topic. Of course you couldn't know that because the WIR report system doesn't show you that information.
Second I think the concentretad attacks of four hq's air groups made the difference. I'm a bit surprised to hear that it had a combat value of 106.
However after the first air strike I saw about 500 squads and not so many tanks. After the last one there were just about 300 squads left. My three corps had more than 1200 more expierenced squads. So the first attack in the first pulse showed roughly 10:1 odds and your army held but my hq's had a lot of op points left! At that point it was almost obvious that your army couldn't hold at the end.
That's all I know...
Dave
P.S. Are my Pzkorps south of Rostov safe?
Posted: Thu Apr 11, 2002 7:58 am
by Svar
Originally posted by itsjustme0770
Whoa Whoa Whoa.....I said WHOA!!!!
Back up. Someone talk to me about the Hearts of Iron game from Paradox. I realize that Beta isn't due until June, but surely someone must know if this is really in serious development, particularly if the developers have the capital to pull it off and pull it off right. If this this is even half way decent and really comes out, I'd really better win the lottery.
Check out this Forum, it has only been open 1 week.
http://www.europa-universalis.com/forum ... forumid=79
This should show you how serious these people are. they have a huge potential market.
Posted: Thu Apr 11, 2002 10:46 am
by Ed Cogburn
Originally posted by itsjustme0770
Whoa Whoa Whoa.....I said WHOA!!!!
Back up. Someone talk to me about the Hearts of Iron game from Paradox.
My sentiments exactly! I'm already chomping at the bit.
Posted: Thu Apr 11, 2002 6:14 pm
by itsjustme0770
Wow, 1 week you say? That forum is pretty well developed already. Excellent, excellent, excellent is all I can say.
Posted: Fri Apr 12, 2002 1:01 pm
by Lokioftheaesir
Originally posted by Die Kriegerin
A while back Loki ( Nick), stated that German units shattered easier during blizzards if thier readness was to high. Is there truth to this?...The reason is, I just lost Leningrad, with a combat value of 106, readness of over 96, experence over 65, entrenchment of 5, and good leadership. One turn, gone. However earler, I had less in all catigories, and survived three other attacks. Any answers. Doe's boosting readiness make a unit more prone to shattering? It dosn't make sense.
Jon
Jon
Thats the way it works. The blizzard combat res system has a higher chance of german shatter the higher the readiness. I do everything i can to keep german readiness between 40 and 60. 50 being just about right. And in 2 games i'm playing as german in blizzard at the moment not one unit has shattered. You must however be willing to give up ground. Only the finns can stand in defence for more than a turn or two.
Good luck
Loki
Posted: Fri Apr 12, 2002 1:03 pm
by PMCN
[Quote]
Die Kriegerin wrote...
A while back Loki ( Nick), stated that German units shattered easier during blizzards if thier readness was to high. Is there truth to this?...The reason is, I just lost Leningrad, with a combat value of 106, readness of over 96, experence over 65, entrenchment of 5, and good leadership. One turn, gone. However earler, I had less in all catigories, and survived three other attacks. Any answers. Doe's boosting readiness make a unit more prone to shattering? It dosn't make sense. [/Unquote]
Yes there is a problem with boosting readiness. Exactly why this occurs is something I am not sure of but that it occurs I know from experience. What seems to happen is that lots of troops show up for a battle and are killed (since your infantry gets no benifit from being entrenched for some reason) and then after that the unit is highly vulurable to shatter since it has little strength left. As a side note air power should be useless in a city attack to be honest, the Luftwaffe leveling Stalingrad did not impair the russian defence in the least. In general it favors the defenders to be honest. Your chance of doing any significant damage to an enemy formation in a city is below minimal. Back to the original topic...
In one battle with v1.13 I attacked Kiev with 5 strong german infantry Korps getting over 10:1 odds with each attack over the period of a month and never caused a retreat even after I started bombing it with every HQ I could find in range (including flying bombers from germany). I do not believe my opponent boosted the readiness of Kiev at all. One time playing the soviets I had 4 Inf, 1 AT, 1 ARTY, 1 CAV division boosted readiness, dug in at Kiev and a single attack by a infantry Korps caused it to shatter. I have seen the same thing time and again in different places. It is worse yet in the blizzard where I have seen a Pz Korp entrenched in a city with 96+ readiness retreat or a Infantry Korps in a scale 5 entrenchement in the mountains shatter. I also one time had a Guards division show up as a russian Army was forced to retreat thru the Pispet marshes and spent most of the time at SL0 and had correspondingly minimal readiness but it never once shattered since so few units showed up to fight it always had lots of strength left over.
The whole readiness business is probably the worst part of the whole combat system. Primarily since it seems to work in counter-intuitive ways.
Posted: Sat Apr 13, 2002 9:20 am
by Ranger-75
Originally posted by Paul McNeely
The whole readiness business is probably the worst part of the whole combat system. Primarily since it seems to work in counter-intuitive ways.
I agree. Defender's Losses should be in proportion to the ATTACKING unit's strength, not the defending unit's readiness (and vice versa). I thought this was the case in the original versions, but research shows this is not true. Units losses are proportinal to their own readiness. So if a unit at 90% readiness attacks a unit at 30 percent readiness (equal exp, tank stats, etc, no entrench terrain values, etc.) then the attacker can lose up to 90% of its strenght while the defender can only lose up to 30% of its strength.
